Discrepancy Between Rainmeter and Resource Monitor

[ansible]

Hi All,

I've noticed a rather large discrepancy between my resource monitor's supposed CPU usage and Rain Meter's. What's causing the discrepancy?

Ansible

[eclectic-tech]

The illustro skin you are using measures the average of all CPU cores.
The UsageMonitor plugin will give you more accurate results.

[ansible]

The illustro skin you are using measures the average of all CPU cores.
The UsageMonitor plugin will give you more accurate results.

Are you sure that's what's going on? When I check the resource monitor, all 8 cores are at max.

[eclectic-tech]

I am sure that skin shows the average and that the UsageMonitor will give you accurate individual core values.

I am not sure why your overclocked core's are all over 80%.

You should check to see what is causing the excessive load
or you could wait until it looks like this...

Then go buy a new one!

[ansible]

I am sure that skin shows the average and that the UsageMonitor will give you accurate individual core values.

I am not sure why your overclocked core's are all over 80%.

You should check to see what is causing the excessive load
or you could wait until it looks like this...

Then go buy a new one!

I'm doing some relatively intensive computing at the moment so it's expected. What's not expected is the rainmeter-resource divergence. Thanks for your help.

[SilverAzide]

I'm doing some relatively intensive computing at the moment so it's expected. What's not expected is the rainmeter-resource divergence. Thanks for your help.

I don't think there is a discrepancy, actually. If you notice in your screenshot, your CPU is running overclocked (138%). Rainmeter is asking Windows for the CPU usage value, and Windows is responding with a value based on the overclocked frequency (i.e., 138% of normal).

So if you take the 78% value from Resource Monitor and reduce it by 38% (78 x .38), you get 29.64%... which is exactly what Rainmeter is showing, rounded to 30%.

Or to think of it another way, if your CPU was not overclocked, it would be at 78% (as shown), but since it IS overclocked, it's only at 30% of it's maximum capability.

[eclectic-tech]

Thanks SilverAzide

I agree that this is a combination of averaging all cores and overclocking the CPUs that is causing the discrepancy.

{Deleted section the 'new' math is beyond me!}

I have seen overclocking cause very strange results when trying to measure.